If Tom Alter counts, then of course he says a lot of Urdu (including some poems) in Shatranch Ki Khilari, back in the '70s. Of course I wouldn't pick that particular movie as an example of commercial success.

When I saw Batman Begins in Taiwan, the entire audience laughed when Bruce Wayne spoke in Chinese. Part of it may have been because his tones were off, but more likely they were just surprised. We are used to hearing stereotypical Chinese accentented English in Hollywood films, but not the other way around.

Suvendra,

Rats, foiled by the 1970s again. But still, you're right that Satyajit Ray doesn't really count as commercial success, so maybe my point stands.

I haven't actually seen Shatranj Ki Khilari (The Chess Players), but the earlier dating of the film -- closer to independence -- might be significant. Is it possible Tom Alter had some earlier experience with India? Perhaps in his family?

Kerim,

We are used to hearing stereotypical Chinese accentented English in Hollywood films, but not the other way around.

Yes, one thing I didn't mention is that I think the general movement represented by movies like The Rising, Lagaan, and so on, is interesting and quite positive. But it might be more interesting to see this kind of cultural crossover at work in a film that isn't such a bloated, patriotic epic. (Maybe someone should remake Ray's "Chess Players"...)

It might also be interesting to see Indian filmmakers make reference to non-white foreigners, including Africans, east Asians, and so on. You see lots of films using Asian locations, especially for songs. But it's as if the Indian-Chinese, the Indo-Tibetans, and so on, don't exist in the world of Indian films. Many of those people speak good Hindi, and could easily be inserted into a commercial Hindi film. (The Tibetan monks I met last year in Ladakh, for instance, all seemed to speak fluent Hindi... not that they would be interested in being in a commercial film)

In a similar vein, someone should make an attempt at a film adaptation of a book like "The Glass Palace"...

Is it possible Tom Alter had some earlier experience with India? Perhaps in his family?

Tom Alter has been in India for most of his life. His parents were American misssionaries in Mussorie where Tom was born. His speaking broken Urdu/Hindi is actually a travesty.

The Tibetan monks I met last year in Ladakh, for instance, all seemed to speak fluent Hindi

I met Tibetans in Dhramshala who spoke Punjabi!

Tom Alter has been in India for most of his life. His parents were American missionaries in Mussorie where Tom was born. His speaking broken Urdu/Hindi is actually a travesty.

Oh, I don't know. I studied hindi for four years in school. I may have even stood first in some examination. But I speak it terribly. I was addressing Amardeep's point of the audience's acceptance of a sympathetic white character speaking hindi. I thought it had worked with Shatranch ki Khilari. I remember walking out of the theater in Kolkata where it was being shown as part of some retrospective. Everyone had that blinking disbelief in their eyes which comes when you leave some immersive world that sucks you in for a few hours.

I guess in a little town like Corvallis, Mangal Pandey will show up in theaters. Will wait for DVD, netflix release.

This morning, I tried to find a good book on Sepoy Mutiny. I guess the best work seems to be by Saul David, "The Indian Mutiny 1857". Let me know if there is a better one.

Tom Alter has spent his life in India (Mussorie) but college was in States. He quite a decent theater actor.

extra credit points for using "y'all" in the opening sentence of a desi post.

Amardeep Rocks!

Amardeep wrote,I haven't actually seen Shatranj Ki Khilari (The Chess Players), but the earlier dating of the film -- closer to independence -- might be significant. Is it possible Tom Alter had some earlier experience with India?

I'm not sure I understood that sentence. Shatranj Ke Khilari is a short story written by Premchand and had a backdrop set to the events that led to the 1857 uprising.

Tom Alter is an Indian. He speaks Urdu quite fluently. Sadly, he is made to speak in accented Urdu/Hindi most of the time - except in Shatranj Khiladi. Sir. Richard Attenborough speaks in English in that film.

My review of The Rising is here.

More on Tom Alter, in his own words

http://www.verveonline.com/27/people/tom/tom.shtml

Heck, I've met Tibetans in Bangalore who speak fluent Tamil and Kannada. Then again, they were wearing saris and churridhas[sp?] as well.

Quizman, I meant that perhaps Alter had some familial connection to the British Raj. I didn't know that he was an American who has lived in India for much of his life when I wrote the comment. (And I know Premchand's story, of course.)

By the way, I enjoyed the 'checklist'.

Kush, thanks for the link. He seems to be a pretty interesting person. It's too bad there haven't been very many roles where he could really show off his facility with Hindi. (Maybe that day is coming.)

I thought that it was great to see a non-Indian play such a major role, and not a cardboard evil "Britisher" as with past Indian films.

I was impressed with his Hindi, but just as compared to the other characters and those in other movies -- like Rachel Shelley ("Elizabeth") from Lagaan.

I am curious though, because I had some of the same thoughts about his ability to express emotion with Hindi. His anger came across the best I thought, but that might have been because it was in Hindi period -- to me, when in times of highest emotion, you go to your most comfortable language. The fact that he would blow up in Hindi was very interesting to me... of course, this might have just been for film purposes.

Anywho... so did Toby Stephens actually learn Hindi for this role, or did he just learn his lines, with a sort of line by line translation to assist in acting? Some of the time, I felt like he was just saying the words he had been taught, but others, I was convinced that he really knew the language.

I have no idea about any of this, and this is of course with my own limited knowledge of Hindi.

Do you know how the movie is being received in India, with such a sympathetic British character? Is it accepted because of history, and Captain Gordon's real assistance? Or is there not much hostility towards Britain left in India, so a kind British character is less controversial than a kind Pakistani one?

For what its worth, my review below which hits on a lot of whats written above.

--

THE RISING has all the right elements of a good story: a visionary takes on the biggest empire the world has ever seen, and in doing so, becomes a mythological enigma in the Indian struggle to gain freedom from British rule.

What can possibly go wrong with a superb idea being realized by talented film-crew? Now that the film is out, we see that there are quite a few things!

The main problem I had with Ketan Mehta's dream project is that he wants the film to be everything, much like a classic 3 act Shakespearean play - all the subplots, cross-eyed comedians, and mustache twirling - but never has enough power to get there.

While I don't find anything wrong with such an epic ambition, I do find it worrysome that he was way over his head in appealing to the International “crossover” audience and while not selling short the Bollywood base.

What ends up happening is that the film is constantly yearning to be a fair retelling of a half-real story but, save for Gordon, played with rare sensitivity by Toby Stevens, the characters become nothing more than predictable puppets who manipulate us and tug at our emotions on cue. The message is the same: Indians, good. British, bad.

There is even an intimate sequence where an Indian woman is shown to make sweet love, while the British woman engages in animal-like sex!

With such a polarized narrative, situations and characters are interlaced between frothy and serious, sometimes in the same scene.

On a technical level, I found the 70's Technicolor cinematography inconsistent at best. For example, why does the final courtroom scene have to be lit so brightly? You can see the glaring spotlights bouncing off of Toby's forehead in a time where there was practically no indoor lighting.

Conversely, why is the wide angle Afghan terrain – which is much harder to light - so beautifully captured? Did the same person show up for work? I am from the school of thought that films, especially ones like this, require the director to maximize the visual power of the medium and leave an everlasting impact. Imagine if THE RISING looked like a Ridley Scott film. Sigh. I can only dream of the could-have-beens!

Such sloppiness may be forgiven in low budget or no-talent films, but not an Aamir Khan film which took 4 years to make and had almost unlimited financial resources from moneybags-Bedi. There are other things I picked up - smaller things - like a Naseeruddin Shah credit (for narration) in the closing credits, instead of Om Puri. Again, I ask, why such sloppy work?

Such a lack of competence/judgment by Ketan Metha and his team is sad in an industry were we don't have the luxury of viewing good films on a regular basis. So, naturally, I expected more out of this film. I wanted more.

While I have not fully vented my complete frustrations, I think I’ve done enough where I can proceed with the film’s redeeming qualities.

And, yes, there are plenty!

Overall, the movie never gets great, it is never really bad, and mostly remains entertaining. The attention to detail is immaculate. Ditto for sound design by Robert Taylor – authentic, if not a little loud at times. Unlike the forced songs, AR Rahman’s background score is non-obtrusive and fitting.

The real saving grace of the whole project was the under-explained, almost homosexual relationship between the severely conflicted, unpredictable (and also fictional) soldier, Gordon, and the emotional, explosive Mangal Pandey.

It is difficult not to feel compassion for Gordon; this was a man who never in peace, and he played the fine line with élan; in everyway he was torn in duty, friendship, patriotism, loyalty, and even love!

Mangal, in contrast, was made out to be nothing more than a 1800's cape-less superhero. I would have liked to see him as a human first, superhero later. Small scenes would have humanized hm, Perhaps a small nervous breakdown before the rising. Or even, show him obey at least one order from the Brits in disgust. One wonders how he stayed in the army when he was shown to never listen to his superiors!

Where are the layers that Gordon has? Where is the deep, internal conflict? Do we need a beautiful prostitute (played by the amazing Rani Mukerjee) to show his “soft-side” and to convince the audience that he really isn’t gay afterall? Sadly, we don't get anything to chew on with Mangal.

This is the real tragedy of the film.

After a few historical events, the movie plateaus to The Rising when Mangal takes on the 10-headed Ravan (the British Company) with their own arrow (the gun). This scene's presentation must be witnessed. The images of one man fighting for freedom ranks one of the best scenes I have seen of its kind in any film! The symbolism thoughtout the movie is right on, but it really shines though with a vegance here.

The intensity in Aamir’s eyes here tells us two things: one, is that he’s one of the most talented actors in the world, and two, that Mangal has realized his calling. Without saying any words, he is telling the whole of India that I, Mangal, a common man, have gone past the point where my life is important to me - it's something much more rewarding - it's important to my fellow Indian, as a symbol for the cost of freedom and the struggles that lay ahead.

While he admits that this may take 100 years to become reality, he is fully aware that his death is needed as a catalyst; the contrast from the bloodshot eyes to the much more calmer ones in the final courtoom sequence show that he has found peace. He sits infront of the court and accepts his fate, death by hanging, without mouthing a word in protest.

His friend, Gordon, on the other hand, doesn't fully get it. He fights for Mangal's intentions, but is forced to answer with a simple “yes or no”, and by doing, so he seals his friends death-sentence.

Until the very end, Gordon has faith in the British believes that if he fights hard enough, there will be vindication accordingly. Everyone else knows the legal procedings are nothing more than a simple song and dance, but for Gordon, it is something much more complex and personal. In a way, his idenity, all the things that define him, are on trial, not Mangal. Afterall, what is a man if he is doesn't fight for what defines him?

It is not until the the last moments of Mangal's death, when he smiles at his english friend, does he finally understand: the whole time Gordon was trying to win the battle, while Mangal was trying to win the war.

If this film reminds you of the war in Iraq, and insurgency, you are not too far off. There are obvious, contemporary references to the US invasion(s) and the “idealogy of insurgency” in Iraq. Maybe today, Mangal Pandey would be an unknown Palanstine suicide-bomber, Abu Musa Al Zarqawi, or even a Osama bin Ladin. Or, maybe he'd just be known as an insurgent terrorist fighting the agressor.

That label, however, would depend on which side of the fence you are on.

2.5/ 4 stars

Talking of Tibetans in India, I'd recommend the 2001 movie 'Samsara' by Pan Nalin, a beautifully cinematographed piece by Pan Nalin, an Indo-Tibetan director. Unfortunately, the DVD was never released in the US by Miramax, which has been sitting on it. It's a story set in the Tibetan community in Ladakh.

Hmmm...this had nothing to do with 1857, but whatever...

Oh, actually, I found it rather quaint to hear Scottish-accented Hindi for the first time ever. I mean, Bollywood has gotten angrezi-fied Hindi down to a stereotyped artform, so a fluid Scottish Hindi was a welcome change.

And no, the audience here in Singapore wasn't tittering, but that's probably coz they were focussing more on the English subtitles, like I was.

Rukku,

everyone loves Toby Stephens in India. especially women. much more than anyone else in the film

I also thought it was great that Toby Stephens got to play a well-developed role with subtly and depth. Because in contrast to Indians, Americans really have a hard time getting roles like that.

It was great. It was also really interesting that he had a love scene. Americans rarely are considered romantic leads in movies, especially if they are in a movie produced in India.

It was so, refreshing

Err..Raju Toby Stephens is English. He's Dame Maggie Smith's son.

its a euphamism, work with me

Tom Alter doesnt count. He has lived in india and studied in India. He went to the states to enter college but is a dropout.
While he has learnt urdu living in India as he did from childhood taught him Hindi. He isa poor actor in that he hams through every role in the effort to get noticed. aamir khan was vehemently opposed to his being part of The Rising but Alter is a friend of the director's and wormed his way through the film . aamir's objection is that ofa thinking actors who never tries to supercede anyone ina scene. while Tom alter gets only one to 3 minute roles so he tries to assert his presence thereby doing more than required and making the scene a travesty. Progresively directors even on satge have realised his claim to being an actor is a hollow one but his american parentage and his Hindi speech make him a
noticeable part ofr Bollywood. He is given bit roles of ajoker kind and thats his niche in the industry. His insistence on projecting himself beyond a scene has got him thrown out of palys by Naseeruddin shah, Vikram Kapadia, films by Hrishikesh Mukherji etc. Bachchan himself had once objected to Alter giving an introduction in that hamming over the top attitude ata function held to pay tribute to his father. But Bollywood is agenerous place and it continues to give the likes of Alter his daily bread.

like a Naseeruddin Shah credit (for narration) in the closing credits, instead of Om Puri. Again, I ask, why such sloppy work?

YES!!! I'm glad someone else noticed this-- it drove me nuts.

I think the concept of a continuity editor is outside the understanding of Bollywood, as an industry...

Pleased that you are discussing abt my film.

_Amir-

Hey 'Amir,'

You misspelled your first name.

I thought "Mangal Pandey" was a very mediocre film, if that. Didn't like it too much. Here's my review :

http://hindimoviereviews.blogspot.com/2005/09/review-mangal-pandey.html

-Amodini

it should'nt be surprisding when he has worked in so many hindi movies. and after all he has been born and brought up in india is'nt it?